KJ360

(Originally posted on http://www.kj360.ca)
It’s been a while since I last posted an update, and there’s a few reasons.

I decided to take a break from the SFUO hypocrisy. The constant barrage of hate fueled rebuttals and illogical and irrational posturing from the organization that purports to  represent ALL students yet does the wishes of the few, while ostracizing the many, became a bit too much. The onslaught of final papers and exams meant that I had to choose between being an active student or being a student. And well, I am at the University of Ottawa to get educated and get a degree, not to learn how to protest, or bring down the government.

As resource optimization picks up momentum though, and the SFUO begins its defense, all this comes back to the forefront. I enjoy how the SFUO brass will complain that the process wasn’t transparent of consultative (which it was btw) while all the while ignoring calls from within its own ranks to become more transparent and consultative.

Do students in generally give a crap about resource optimization? I don’t know, and well neither does the SFUO, but instead of asking students, the plan of attack is to tell student they care, and that they are firmly against it! I for one have read the report, and would support a majority of the recommendations. For instance, user fees are a valid solution to budget issues. User fees are designed to reduce the burden of paying for a service on the entire population, while raising it for those who actually use said service. So for instance, there is a recommendation to raise user fees for Visual Arts studios. I do not use those studios, neither do any other students not in visual arts, so why should every student have to pay a portion of their remittances to the school to go toward those studios? We have instituted user fees in the greater city, province, and country and they work. When you go swimming at the Nepean Sportsplex, you gotta pay a couple of bucks. You wanna use a visual arts studio, you gotta pay the price. It’s unfortunate that it comes down to this, but as they say, tough times call for tough measures. Of course, if we were to raise tuition to a more market friendly amount, we would be able to have this excess amount of funding necessary to forgo user fees….

But I digress. Next week the SFUO is hosting a BBQ (using student money no doubt), in order to “trick” students into coming to a protest. I for one am unsure if I am going to go.  I mean, my money is being spent on a BBQ and I certainly wouldn’t mind reaping at least some benefits, but I damn well don’t want to be counted as joining the protest. We’ll see…

The final BOA meeting of the “year” happens this afternoon in the TBT Boardroom.

I will not be attending as papers are more of a priority at this point. But last year they had pizza

(Originally posted on http://www.kj360.ca)
Remember my last post, where I mentioned that I submitted a complaint to the Student Arbitration Committee (SAC) about the constitutional irregularities of the recent by-election? I was complaining about the lack of publicity for the Nomination period (constitutionally mandated at 2 editions of each newspaper for special elections & they Election committee decided on 0). Well last post I told of the update I received, where I was told that due to a lack of bodies the SAC was unsure if they could take my complaint (a complaint I am completely entitled to via the constitution btw).

This evening I received their decision on how they would proceed: they are sending my complaint against the Election Committee to the Election Committee for them to review and decide on.

(Originally posted on http://www.kj360.ca)
It’s a question we need to ask: can the SFUO govern itself?

There is little faith in the Student Arbitration Committee. I think the collapse came late last year when the BOA decided to relieve the sitting arbitrators from their positions and appoint new ones. In the middle of a dispute. A dispute several voting members of the BOA forced.

This year I know of a few complaints that have not be discussed by the SAC due to the lack of resources. Mainly a lack of bodies. Because the person responsible for making sure the SAC is fully stocked with arbitrators did not do it.

I submitted a contestation of the recent BOA By-Elections based on the Constitutional irregularities of the nomination period. I said that the results should be dismissed and a proper, constitutionally valid by-election be held in September.

However, I received this e-mail today:

Hi Kenneth,

I just wanted to confirm with you that the SAC has received your election dispute. Due to the lack of capacity of the SAC at the moment, we are looking into the ability of reviewing your case.

We will get back to you asap.

Sincerely,

Julia McDonald
Chief Arbitrator

So if the SAC does not have the capacity to deal with legitimate complaints, what means do individual members of the Federation have to ensure that their rights outlined in the constitution are upheld?

(Originally posted on http://www.kj360.ca)
This morning a number of students woke up with a unpleasant surprise from a certain someone. Mr. Marc Kelly ladies and gentleman! (my comments are in bold)
dear friends, new friends, old friends, unknown friends, close friends, distant friends, potential friends, an everyone else

(if at any point you want me to stop talking, the delete button located either near the top or at the bottom) doesn’t make spam right

i hope it’s okay i found my way into your inbox again it’s not

today is April 7th, 2010, and i am sending this message out to you and to everyone because, after tomorrow, i may not be able to speak to anyone on campus again because the University is sending me to prison the court system sends people to prison for breaking the law. and I am sure it won’t be an indefinite sentence either (if he does serve any time). so a tad melodramatic and over the top.

have a nice wednesday everybody I will!

(Originally posted on http://www.kj360.ca)
I was doing some random musings on this subject to myself while talking a long walk in the storm tonight. And the fact that the question was raised earlier tonight about whether Obama will be a one-term President. But that’s not the question at hand.

I thought about the problem in a completely different way than I usually do, and to be honest I haven’t heard this musing before, so I thought I would put it out there for you guys to read and tell me I’m stupid. The usual blog type stuff.

I love universal health care. I think the United States is a travesty because it does not provide for its population where it counts. When 35-40 Million Americans do not have health coverage because they are too more and millions upon millions more are at risk of losing coverage, which should be considered a national priority. So what’s wrong with the new US health care bill?

No Public Option. That’s what wrong with it.

What the US is going to do for those 35-40 Million people without insurance is step in a buy them insurance, and what I can only presume to be market rates. So the American taxpayer is pretty much getting screwed. But I’ll be clear on this point: it is the fault of the Republicans for haphazardly getting the public option removed.

Imagine this: you are one of the unlucky souls without any coverage. When you application would have come, you would fill it out like a normal health care form, and then there would be a part where you select who you want to provide your insurance. It would list a bunch of companies, and then somewhere would be an option to select the United States Government provider. Hence it’s called the public option (no one forced to choose it). But if you did choose it, you would be saving the government money, as the government would be directly paying the health care providers, and not an insurance company, who would then pay the provider. The public option would take away the profit hungry middle man.

But, alas, that is not my musing, for that is pretty standard fare. Here is where I took it to tonight:

There is also a provision in the legislation that prohibits insurance companies from dropping people for various conditions. A very important aspect, because what good is insurance if it won’t help you when you get sick?

That will no doubt increase the cost of doing business for these companies. And since these huge insurance corporations deal with profit levels, they will no doubt have to increase their premiums. Thus there would be a de facto increase in the cost of the program in order to provide coverage for the initial 35-40 Million Americans. But on top of that, when the premiums increase, a whole whack of other people will likely no longer be able to afford coverage and have to rely on the publicly funded system, putting a much larger strain on an already hurting public purse.

Now to another level. Companies will be less likely now to provide coverage for their workers. I mean, if you own a small business and you pay a bunch of money to make sure you employees have health insurance, you are probably going to be looking at this new plan and say, “I can save how much by cutting the insurance? And I won’t feel guilty because they will be able to get on the public system? Where do I sign?” A system designed for 40 million people won’t be able to hold 100 million people. Not without it being a public system. The system will collapse under the pressure and take a ton of people with it.

This is why I think this system will be the death of America. Or more likely the reason Obama will be a one-term President. Unless of course the Republicans nominate Sarah Palin. Then he’s gonna be re-elected.

(Originally posted on http://www.kj360.ca)
Is that how you spell it? “Splainin”? I was going for a colloquial version of explaining, for those who don’t follow.

The University of Guelph students association is currently in the midst of that fabled thing: A CFS Deferedation Referendum. (So fabled is it that “defederation” is not in my spell check dictionary!) It seems our current SFUO VP-Finance Roxanne Dubois, who is also the CFS National Treasurer-Elect, absconded to the lovely city of Guelph to encourage their students to not leave the CFS. Of course, the only time the CFS puts any amount of focus into a campus is when they want their money.

Word on the street is that Roxanne didn’t even say she was going there. So we should ask her whether or not she’s drawing an SFUO salary for her time at Guelph, considering she skipped an Executive meeting.

What should we make of this? Well, for starters, Roxanne values the CFS more than the SFUO.  Wanna go campaign for them? Do it on your own time. Don’t miss an executive meeting because you wanna travel to Guelph (presumably on student money).

Next, Roxanne has likely began to “Check-Out” of her duties here at the SFUO. Hence, not fulfilling her responsibilities here (as we elected her to do). Sick? Family emergency? Fine, miss an executive meeting (but don’t try to hide it from people).

I suspect this will be brought up at the next BOA meeting. I predict her answer will be along the lines of: “I did that on my own time, if you want to discuss it further I can talk with you after.”

(Originally posted on http://www.kj360.ca)
The University of Ottawa is playing around with the idea of no longer offering a Bachelor of Social Science  degree, but rather all of the program that currently deliver such a degree would instead produce a Bachelor of Arts for graduates.

While the debate lingers on the pretentious I will share that the fact that the University of Ottawa has a Faculty of Soc.Sci and offers such a degree was the main reason I chose to come here. And I know a few other people where that played a role in their decision making.

There is a difference between the Social Sciences and the Arts. Simply put, the Social Sciences attempt to explain. Much like other Sciences such as Chemistry, Physics and Biology, the Social Sciences want to posit a hypothesis and explain how the system works. On the other hand, many of the Arts describe. A true historian tries not to offer a subjective explanation of the events but rather just tell the story of what happened.  The Theatre major studies plays, and acting, but doesn’t generally offer an explanation of why. Whereas a Political Science student will ready Isaiah Berlin and take his concepts of Negative and Positive Liberty and put them to work in our current society, and then make a subjective opinion of which works best, while using the study of History to compare different eras. (For those who haven’t deduced yet, I do not consider true history to be a Social Science. This do not preclude specific areas of history from falling under the Soc.Sci. like Political History).

(Originally posted on http://www.kj360.ca)

(Originally posted on http://www.kj360.ca)
UPDATE: Around 6:15 pm tonight the candidates received an e-mail telling them their cheques for reimbursements were available.

Remember that election we had back in February? The candidates certainly do, since they haven’t had their expenses reimbursed yet! I haven’t spoken with all the candidates, but the ones I have are still waiting on their money. The only answer I can think of is that there is insolvency issues, because poor management form the elections office is out of the question right?

This should definitely be part of the campaign to get candidates next year. I mean, on one day they are yelling that students don’t have enough money and everything should be cheaper (tuition, bus pass, etc) but won’t live up to their obligations to repay students money they are rightfully owed. Shame.