Bob Green Innes,


Hamiltonian by birth & occupation!  

.... seeking to restore values, traditions, institutions, laws and protections Canadians once enjoyed
      .....lost by apathy
          ..... but stolen nonetheless

Lost? Broken Link?

Try changing the file extension from .html to .php or vice versa. Sorry for the inconvenience


FCP, CAP, Election 2011

Bank of Canada (BOC)

Money - create, inflate, deflate, banks


LRT 1ST, Latest

Stadium, Ti-Cats, Pan-Am

student debt, OSAP

Light bulbs, ban



Please note that I'm having some problems with this article as one long page being truncated. So I split the article up and moved segments to a new blogsite as a series of short articles. You might leave this page open as a kind of table of contents with the moved items indented below. Some sections are still here for the present. here instead! Thanks, Bob Innes.

Table of Contents

(Indented sections are located at my new blogsite. Use T/C for navigation. )
        The Central Bank Dilemma - Easy Money vs Jobs vs Inflation
        Historical Examples
        Is free money free? - The Technicality
        Definitions & BoC functions
        BoC's Dilemma - inflation vs jobs and The Gold Stardard
        BoC History and Development

    • BoC Independence,
    • .... moving to,
    • Joint Responsibility system, - sort of,
    • Total Nationalization - New Zealand's system,
    • Milestones,
    • BoC mechanics,
    • Bank Supervision

Synopsis of how monetary policy works in the economy, charts
        Trudeau and Monetarism How it screwed us all.
        Governmint Made Money - Safe or Not - Cautions, Interest, Froth, Debt, Social Asset Model
        A Small Central Bank, An Avalanche of Fuddle Duddle. - Externalities, Peak everything, EnviroHell, QE....
        Blackbeard and the Bankers - Globalism Super Bubble, Banksters, Radical Perspectives
Personal Ruminations
The Future
Work Needed

Bank of Canada - Back to the Future?
Could this little known institution be the key to overcoming our employment problems?

A Layman's Assessment. Blog 26, too late in July, 2011

The Bank of Canada hereinafter referred to as the BoC, is Canada's Central Bank.

The Canadian Action Party (CAP) and others have for many years promoted the idea that Canada is being strangled by the fact that commercial interests, instead of the Federal Government, create our money, and these interests are causing the government to fall into a debt trap, which could pose many dangers to our sovereignty. Even in today's favourable interest-rate climate, Canadians pay more than $60 million per DAY in interest on Federal (only) loans. This is more than enough money to solve many problems such as excessive unemployment, unfair student loan system, Canada's 3rd world Native reserves, etc. By using the special powers of the BoC, public interest payments could be either eliminated or returned to the treasury as profits or dividends.

Continue with BoC Dilemma - Easy Money vs Jobs vs Inflation. Use Table of Contents above for navigation.


The government wants to spend money to stimulate the economy. It can do what many people do, wait till it gets the money from taxes or it can borrow the money . . . or, to a limited degree, as discussed, it can spend the money into existence. Borrowing the money is the same for both you and the government: go to the bank, make a contract, bankers create the money out of thin air by crediting your account with the amount stipulated. The contract, in the government's case is called a bond or a treasury bill. We can say that the government 'sells' bonds to the banks; it is the same thing. Banks can sell these bonds to the public or institutions. The government can and does cut out the middleman and sell bonds directly to the public (citation needed).


Here is what the BoC says about how it manages all this inter-related money creation:

Commercial banks and other financial institutions provide most of the assets used as money through loans made to individuals and businesses. In that sense, financial institutions create, or can create money.

The Bank of Canada manages the rate of money growth indirectly through its influence on short-term interest rates, or through the reserves provided to large deposit-taking institutions. When short-term interest rates change, they tend to carry other interest rates - such as mortgage rates and other lending rates from commercial banks - along with them. When interest rates rise, consumers and businesses tend to hold less money, to borrow less, and to pay back existing loans. The result is a slowing in the growth of M1+ and in the other broader monetary aggregates.

The money taken in (taxes, loans) is credited to the account of the government. The government decides, for instance, to make interest free loans to help municipalities build roads and sewers, so it urges municipalities to start work and eventually credits their account with the money. The money is later paid out to contractors, employees, etc. Each time the money is deposited in a bank by municipalities, contractors, and employees, they flow into bank reserves, which allow banks to loan out more money in proportion to their leverage, usually 5 or 10 to one. Banks are under competitive pressure to make loans, so they encourage borrowing, which stimulates the economy, once for each new 'layer' of loans that is piled on top of the original money. There are many sites on the internet showing how this process works to multiply the original money by a factor of about 10, assuming modest reserve requirements.

In a $1trillion economy such as ours, creating money at a rate of 2% equates to about $20 billion ($30Bn for GDP=$1.5T)

Ideally, as the cycle ends, the municipality repays its loan, and money is 'destroyed' in a manner that disengages the forces of inflation. In reality, this rarely occurs, as municipalities get a grant not a loan. Therefore, the supply of money just keeps increasing, chasing goods and services and putting upward pressure on prices.


Having read this and other literature, I am convinced that the inventors of the BoC knew exactly what they were doing in WW2 with pre-planned dollar and exchange controls and (later on) wage and price controls, and to believe that all that is needed is for the BoC to print huge amounts of money does not accord with its actual history. Hitlerian type massive programs, as noted, involve a lot more than just a monetary overhaul , and are beyond the scope of this article.

Is it possible to use the 'out' clause (the Directive)? It is available but, like a poison pill in the stock market, is usable only at a high political cost and will immediately flag impending inflationary actions. When it comes to money, such upfront honesty and transparency is probably not possible, which is why important announcements are made after markets have closed.

Some are hoping for a straight line benefit-something like print more, spend more, employ more. Although I'm no expert, I have concluded that it just ain't that easy. There are many interrelated elements-controlled variables (interest rates, reserves) and consequent variables (exchange rates, inflation [CPI], foreign reserves, unemployment, GDP). Another blog discusses how the latter indicators have been manipulated for the benefit of politicians.

For example, if we sell lots of oil, wheat and gold, our dollar goes up, which forces us to lower interest rates to keep it down. This encourages more borrowing, and borrowing can overheat an economy and waste valuable capital in non-productive ventures/pleasures. As debts become unpayable, the system implodes, sinking employment.

If we print a lot of dollars, hopefully, we spend it to boost employment, which could reduce welfare expenses and boost tax revenues, theoretically leading to surpluses. Presumably, the economy grows, but if it grows not as much as the printing warrants, then inflation will later appear. Higher prices for you! After a suitable delay, bond markets will recognize their error and go on strike which would force interest rates up, which cools the economy and forces people out of work.

Soros [ref 1 p 156] gives an interesting observation. "Every currency regime has its own shortcomings. Fixed exchange rates are too rigid and prone to break down, floating exchange rates tend to swing too much; managed floats and crawling pegs tend to reinforce the trend they seek to moderate..... Whatever regime prevails, its opposite looks more attractive.

During my read of this book, I've been trying to find a way to put our Canadian monetary system into a diagram format similar to my effort on the FED which seems to be quite popular in some quarters. My attempt to portray the various mechanisms operating on the Canadian Economy came out looking like . the 'Labyrinth' board game where little dials tilt the board and you have to move the marble through an obstacle course to the finish. In the game below, however, there are two sets of dials, outer dials spun by external forces and inner dials (variables) controlled by Canadians (marked by *). Canadians must try to keep the marble centered on the word 'Economy' while external opponents try to twiddle the dials so that our marble (economy) runs off the board.

Chart 1

The main variables missing from Chart 1 are externalities and the effect of time since many of the monetary instruments are slow acting and probably somewhat self-reinforcing. If China had not taken over many of our industries, we would not be having this discussion. So we need to put the above diagram "inside" another chart.

The game below acts like the teeter-totter found in school yards, except that instead of having a fixed pivot in the middle, the pivot (^)itself moves closer to the 'heavier' (more costly) end, indicating that benefits 'run down' to the less costly economy. I suppose you can think of the bigger numbers as having gravity that attracts the pivot. I hope your browser can show this properly-the coding is very primitive, so things may be out of alignment and probably it will not print properly at all.

Our Economyinvisible -spacer? what browser?Other Economies (China)
                Labour rates
                Tax Rates, direct & indirect to pay for         
                        Infrastructure & regulatory burden
                        = Cost of living, plus
                Enegy cost/efficiency, plus
                Resource cost/ efficiency, plus
                Cost of capital, capital needed
                = Total production cost

Big #s pull pivot closer        ^                                This end sinks --- ie
                 Pivot Pt                                gets the money & employment
                 < Moves >                                makes their currency rise unless pegged (China)
                                                        they become less competitive, trade swings back
                                                        unless discouraged by trade barriers
                                                                or currency pegs (unfair trade)
Chart 2

If you liked the above charts, you'll love this chart from the BoC itself.


Crime and Punishment The previous segments have explored how the Bank of Canada (BoC) is a unique asset to Canada, different in fundamental potential from the Fed in the US. But that it is not a cornucopia-- it cannot solve every little problem or enable unrestrained spending. It is not a free lunchbox. It is not a plaything for politicians, who come and go.

We have also seen there is another side to the coin. Globalism, corporatism, market fundamentalism, monetarism, untransparent treaties, maritime law/ tax havens, loss of people's civil protections, are all tearing at the fabric of modern society and undermining the safeguards that have stood for a millenium since the power of kings began to be checked in premedieval England. Money, and the ability to create or destroy it at pleasure is the root of this evil. Which is where the banksters come in. Goldman Sachs is the largest contributer to the Democrats AND the Republicans.

Money itself is not evil, it could even be considered 'sacred' since

  • it frees humanity from the limitations of barter and
  • if frees humanity from the burden of backbreaking & environmentally destructive hoarding of precious metals,
  • it facilitates our creative efforts that raise civilization to ever higher planes of existence.

Such benefit can only be realized if protected and this is only possible if the management of money is understood as a 'sacred' duty. But how can this protection be accomplished?

In short, probably only a Sword of Damocles can safeguard society from wayward machinations of those who misuse their power to create money. Society certainly seems to have its priorities backwards. Those who rob or kill a few times are given harsh sentences while those who manage to rob trillions get bonuses the next year. The raw abuse of this special power should be the only legitimate reason for the ultimate punishment - the hangman's noose. Mass murderers like Robert Picton, no matter how horriffic their crimes, can be seen as sad victims of twisted personal reactions, but with but little impact on humanity - tens or hundreds. They should be locked away to safeguard their communities. Sociopaths, psychopaths and moneyopaths, are dangerous but not widely destructive until they gain the levers of political OR MONETARY power, whence they can unleash such misery that only the rope can bring a halt to. They are far too rich and dangerous to merely lock up, at least since kings lost the keys. Madoff was one such character, involved as he was in the very institutions designed to protect invested monies which made him a cut 'above' Lord Black, who had no such powers. But nobody has been charged in the meltdown of 2008. The public suffers as nobody fixes the problem and is furious that banksters only get rewards, never punishment, not even the ignomy of bankruptcy in a supposedly free market system.

No doubt I cannot begin to resolve this problem, given how hard subtle wrongdoing is to prove and how a Central Bankster like Greenspan could confuse everybody for years with his bafflegab. Could anyone prove malice aforethought? But consider the thoughts of Woodrow Wilson in The New Freedom (1913), "Since I entered politics, I have chiefly had men's views confided to me privately. Some of the biggest men in the United States, in the Field of commerce and manufacture, are afraid of something. They know that there is a power somewhere so organized, so subtle, so watchful, so interlocked, so complete, so pervasive, that they better not speak above their breath when they speak in condemnation of it."

Fast forward to 1963, conspiracists contend that "Shortly before President John F. Kennedy was murdered in Dallas, Texas, he made certain statements, any one of which would align powerful antagonistic forces against him:
  1. 1) He would eliminate the CIA,
  2. 2) He would issue Treasury greenbacks (which don’t pay interest) in lieu of financing government deficits through the Federal Reserve, and
  3. 3) He spoke against empowering the state of Israel with nuclear capability. "
  4. <

#2 is detailed as follows: On June 4, 1963, a little known attempt was made to strip the Federal Reserve Bank of its power to loan money to the government at interest. On that day President John F. Kennedy signed Executive Order No. 11110 that returned to the U.S. government the power to issue currency, without going through the Federal Reserve. Mr. Kennedy's order gave the Treasury the power "to issue silver certificates against any silver bullion, silver, or standard silver dollars in the Treasury." This meant that for every ounce of silver in the U.S. Treasury's vault, the government could introduce new money into circulation. In all, Kennedy brought nearly $4.3 billion in U.S. notes into circulation. The ramifications of this bill are enormous. The article goes on to note that the order is still valid but after Kennedy's death, was never used again. Hmm. Sure looks fishy doesn't it.

But since nobody can get the 'system' to dig into this (or any of the other many controversies, which they like to label as conspiracy theories) it remains speculative. Speculative, but believable, and perhaps even probable. For persons who would initiate such heinous deeds, hanging would be too kind a punishment. The very fact that societies have been unwilling and unable to hang their miscreant banksters almost guarantees that such bankers develop psychopathic attributes, especially when multigenerational dynastic families can, from birth, inculcate their supra royal perrogatives in the next generation.

This is not the place to argue for abolition of the death penalty for ordinary murderers, although I'm sure the justice and prison industry always hates to lose a paying customer! In nations such as Canada which have abolished the death penalty, one could certainly argue that making an exception for bankers and other perpetrators of royal treason could possibly have a deterrent effect. Possibly, but not very
likely. I'll leave it for commenters to develop this line of thought a bit further.
The entire question revolves around our laws and notions of crime. Is a central banker like our Mark Carney really a mastermind setting out to enslave us? He looks like a hero at the moment but I think more due should be given to the system he inherited, rooted as it was in Scottish banking concepts. Says the Economist: The Canadian nationwide branch banking system evolved from its Scottish roots in the early nineteenth century to its present structure dominated by five big banks. The Canadian set-up can be viewed as a grand bargain whereby oligopoly with limited entry would be permitted in exchange for financial stability but it would be a tightly regulated. The Yanks got the more competitive but less stable unit banking from a more British heritage.

Activists throwing around words like 'free money' should review carefully all the tension and struggle agonized over in B&M's Buck book during much of which, Hellyer's proposed system was in place. At the very least, BoC advocates could be quite shocked at finding it to be a force to be reckoned with in defence of sound money management. For Canada's sake, hopefully, the BoC will continue to be able to stand up to politicians hyperventilating about some problem or other. Conflating monetary policies with globalisation or poverty issues is a mistake. The poverty industry calls for an avalanche of free money, which only distorts reality for a time until the chickens come home to roost as in Ontario's dysfunctional housing and rental markets, ruined by decades of leftist meddling. The BoC history outlined in the Buck book* shows that the BoC is likely to pursue a careful course, attending diligently to inflationary pressures. I gained more respect for the BoC's restrained and careful management than for B&M's strident and activist polemic. Sometimes, governments have to let the Canadian people solve their own problems.

It isn't how much you spend that matters, it's how you spend the money you have. The key to prosperity and income equity is not to be found in loose money but in greater discipline and wiser use of the wealth we do have. Canada has not been capable of any honest non-partisan re-examination of how it wastes so much money and how the money it spends is forcing imbalances in the system, a good example of which is wage disparities between public and private sectors. We get paralyzed on the public/private debate in 'health' care without discussing that it is really a doctor care system, 'health' being relegated to minor municipal committees. Such imbalances, alongside financial and regulatory imbalances, have crept into the system over many years and must be removed in order to restore health and vigour to the Canadian economy.

To restrict Canada to exclusive use of the BoC is (presumably) to accept the discipline evident in BoC history. Hooray! It's about time! The BoC has always targeted inflation to the consternation of politicians who think the solution to every problem is throwing money at it. To say we would eschew the use of commercial credit to avoid paying interest to banks, is to say we would not run deficits except as covered by a modest free money portion (once the debt is paid off). This would be a wonderful gift to our children, especially if we did a bit better and paid off most of the mortgage now accruing on their shoulders. Whatever that takes is okay by me.

In a country as rich and heavily taxed as Canada, there is no need to borrow from the future, either fiscally or monetarily, to meet the needs of today and especially the ability of the less fortunate citizens to enjoy the fruits of their labour. One word would be all it takes to solve most of our problems, but unfortunately that word is 'NO'. To yield to the leftist biases of people such as authors B&M would be to place Canada on an unstable spendthrift path where short-term benefits would result in a future detriment. It is far better to be more honest and transparent in our politics and humble in our expectations. If we want to keep Canada intact and as one of the best places on Earth to live, we should continue to accept monetary discipline as a necessary part of a balanced life and polity.


Advocates of expanded BoC operations will not avoid the charge that their ideas are inflationary. The thesis developed here is that the only way to avoid inflation is to practice strict discipline along the lines outlined by Hellyer and the practices of past BoC Governors. This becomes even more important if elected advocates were to undo the BoC's semi-independent status. The power to create money is a sacred responsibility on which the stability of a nation depends. An undisciplined, self-serving (well-intentioned even), excessively used BoC would surely create a Zimbabwean situation of destructive inflation. Just the anticipation of such an event could be disruptive since it is only convenience and confidence that really keeps the present system afloat. Not every problem can be solved all at once. This is not to suggest that a revitalised BoC cannot be achieved. As our grandmothers said: everything in moderation.

Paul Hellyer and the Canadian Action Party is to be commended for introducing this entire subject for consideration, at least in my biased view. It is bringing into focus both the self-defeating nature of bleeding our wealth and sovereignty to creditors (banks or bondholders), and the risk of an even worse scenario to come should interest rates increase substantially (a very real possibility in my mind). In addition, it points to possibly the only way that Canada can resolve its half century of mostly profligate spending represented by a shameful debt/GDP ratio.

Finally and most importantly, the CAP is reminding us of the possibilities inherent in a bolder, made in Canada solution that restores the proper balance between humanity and money as the servant, not the master, even if some discipline and a little saintliness is required in the process. The simple act of paying down the debt would normally have a recessionary, even deflationary effect (money taken out of circulation) which, in the global environment at the moment could arguably be worse than inflation brought on by monetary stimulus. We can't just be careful, we must also be bold if we want to solve our problems.

The idea of the BoC being a stronger, more positive force benefiting both ordinary Canadians and our economy should be pursued with vigour. Evidence shows that the BoC has been a consistent advocate of discipline and, at times, of our sovereign right as a nation to chart our own course, as quaint as that seems today. If politicians had listened more carefully, we might be spared much of the mess we find ourselves in today, but it is never too late to start setting things right, especially when the blueprint for a revitalised BoC is right there in front of us.

My apologies for the sad state of references in this study. The primary book referred to,Where the Buck Stops by Babad and Mulroney, was (I hope) identified throughout the text. Published 1995 by Stoddart. Then I realized I had better include the relevant CAP pages as links - I'm not listing all the links here. This means that the third book I referenced turns out to be:
#1. The Credit Crisis of 2008 and What it Means, George Soros, 2008, Public Affairs/ Perseus Book Group

As my kid says, my bad.


CAP has not reached critical mass enough to warrant close media scrutiny of this, most unique part of its platform. Accordingly, many aspects will require much more study as we move forward:
  • review of legalities/ regulations involved,
  • review of detailed historic economic/ technical (monetary) aspects, comprehensive modeling
  • review of the feasibility of what is recommended vis-a-vis present day economics
  • identify barriers, costs and resistances to implementation
  • study alternatives like New Zealand and their experience

At some point, the proposal should be reviewed by BoC and Finance Ministry officials, academics and any other relevant institution such as The Office of the Superintendent of Financial Institutions (OSFI). Some quiet backroom support from someone at the BoC or an involved economist/ academic would go a long way to confirm this as being the right thing for Canada.


These aren't related directly to the BoC but in a roundabout sort of way, I think they're part of the picture.
Fed Extends Lending Program for Central Banks, By LUCA DI LEO, JUNE 29, 2011, 5:50 A.M. ET

WASHINGTON—The Federal Reserve, amid persistent worries about Europe’s sovereign debt crisis, last week quietly approved the extension of a crisis-lending program that allows the European Central Bank to tap the U.S. for dollars, Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis President James Bullard said.

The Fed’s dollar-lending agreements with the ECB—as well as the central banks of England, Canada, Japan and Switzerland—were scheduled to expire Aug. 1. The Fed and other central banks haven’t yet disclosed renewal of the agreements, known as swap lines. ...

Under the agreement, the Fed can lend an unlimited amount of dollars to foreign central banks for a fee, and they in turn lend them to local commercial banks. The program was launched during the crisis because many foreign banks, especially those in Europe, had trouble tapping short-term dollar loans in credit markets, yet they needed access to dollars to fund their holdings of mortgage bonds and other U.S.-dollar-denominated debt.

The Fed says it takes no risk in these swap lines because foreign central banks, not the commercial banks, are obligated to return the dollars. At the height of the financial crisis, foreign central banks tapped the Fed for more than $600 billion of these loans.

Iceland Declares Independence from International Banks

By Bill Wilson – Iceland is free. And it will remain so, so long as her people wish to remain autonomous of the foreign domination of her would-be masters — in this case, international bankers.

On April 9, the fiercely independent people of island-nation defeated a referendum that would have bailed out the UK and the Netherlands who had covered the deposits of British and Dutch investors who had lost funds in Icesave bank in 2008.

At the time of the bank’s failure, Iceland refused to cover the losses. But the UK and Netherlands nonetheless have demanded that Iceland repay them for the “loan” as a condition for admission into the European Union.

In response, the Icelandic people have told Europe to go pound sand. The final vote was 103,207 to 69,462, or 58.9 percent to 39.7 percent. “Taxpayers should not be responsible for paying the debts of a private institution,” said Sigriur Andersen, a spokeswoman for the Advice group that opposed the bailout. ......

Under the terms of the agreement, Iceland would have had to pay £2.35 billion to the UK, and €1.32 billion to the Netherlands by 2046 at a 3 percent interest rate. Its rejection for the second time by Iceland is a testament to its people, who feel they should bear no responsibility for the losses of foreigners endured in the financial crisis.

That opposition to bailouts led to Iceland’s decision to allow the bank to fail in 2008. Not that the taxpayers there could have afforded to. As noted by Bloomberg News, at the time the crisis hit in 2008, “the banks had debts equal to 10 times Iceland’s $12 billion GDP.”

“These were private banks and we didn’t pump money into them in order to keep them going; the state did not shoulder the responsibility of the failed private banks,” Iceland President Olafur Grimsson told Bloomberg Television.

The voters’ rejection came despite threats to isolate Iceland from funding in international financial institutions. Iceland’s national debt has already been downgraded by credit rating agencies, and now those same agencies have promised to do so once again as punishment for defying the will of international bankers.

This is just the latest in the long drama since 2008 of global institutions refusing to take losses in the financial crisis. Threats of a global economic depression and claims of being “too big to fail” have equated to a loaded gun to the heads of representative governments in the U.S. and Europe. Iceland is of particular interest because it did not bail out its banks like Ireland did, or foreign ones like the U.S. did.

If that fervor catches on amongst taxpayers worldwide, as it has in Iceland and with the tea party movement in America, the banks would have something to fear; that is, the inability to draw from limitless amounts of funding from gullible government officials and central banks. It appears that the root cause is government guarantees, whether explicit or implicit, on risk-taking by the banks.

Ultimately, such guarantees are not necessary to maintain full employment or even prop up an economy with growth, they are simply designed to allow these international institutions to overleverage and increase their profit margins in good times — and to avoid catastrophic losses in bad times.

The lesson here is instructive across the pond, but it is a chilling one. If the U.S. — or any sovereign for that matter — attempts to restructure their debts, or to force private investors to take a haircut on their own foolish gambles, these international institutions have promised the equivalent of economic war in response. However, the alternative is for representative governments to sacrifice their independence to a cadre of faceless bankers who share no allegiance to any nation.

It is the conflict that has already defined the beginning of the 21st Century. The question is whether free peoples will choose to remain free, as Iceland has, or to submit.

Global 'train wreck' coming

THE global economy is facing ''a slow-motion train wreck'' with Greece only the first nation to be hit, Reserve Bank director Warwick McKibbin has told a Melbourne conference.

Professor McKibbin told the Melbourne Institute conference dozens of European countries now had gross government debts on track to exceed 60 per cent of GDP. ''Japan is forecast to be 200 per cent of GDP, the US is forecast to be over 100 per cent of GDP,'' he said. Advertisement: Story continues below

At zero interest rates that can be sustained, but at 5 per cent interest rates countries have to put aside 5 per cent of their GDP every year just to service the debt. That is not sustainable.

Have Your Say

Commenting is now in an online forum
Hopefully clicking this link will open a new window so you can refer to the original in this window. You don't have to register. Enjoy.

Go to home page (or refresh if there already)

Recent Blogs

Re - recent bid for trustee

Coming Up

    MyStoneyCreek asks pertinent questions - i'd better explain myself - if that is possible!

    Solar energy vs the last of the PIIGS vs local efforts

    Banking, money risks, a modest proposal

    Reflections on a Greek phrase

    Forcing my mind to grapple further with that pesky smart meter thing. I'd hate to be a party pooper when it comes to the good intent of the smart meter - BUT.........

    So much to mention - GMO foods, fluoridation, dogcast listening, Puppy - maybe I'll put up a sort of note space for miscellaneous

    Ongoing economic meltdown - two threads: Hamilton's unique problems and the more general economic melting down of the US. Four Horsemen.

    Global warming questions and myths. I'll borrow this for now.

    Eventually, thoughts on the deeper questions that vex our world.

Favs & Locals

Bob's BlogLog

    This website is finally getting to be something organized. Alas, just as it's getting into full swing, it's getting full! I'll be keeping this site alive for various purposes, but I'll be more or less migrating to my page at, probably with a trailer here.

    In case you had some difficulty with broken links, please be patient. I'm just changing files over to php so if something doesn't work, try changing the extension from .html to .php. PHP cuts the storage requirements and facilitates the updating of anciliary sections like this one. Master files are used that are pulled into every page (links, header, footer, favs, breviations, etc). For anyone interested, the clever command that is used for this is 'include', the syntax for which can be found on the net. Very cool, no?

    Most blogs are based on simple table layouts - two or three column using a markup language. The professional sites have sophisticated coding in many languages to provide many features such as automatic archiving, variable text size and the like. We shall see what the future brings but for now I'm just enjoying using HTML and a smidgeon of others such as PHP, javascript. CSS looked interesting too but with the above php setup, looks to be unneeded. Debugging is not my strong suit but this page is nothing like the old basic programs that once drove me nuts.
    Next: I'll also be starting to group blogs on the same page - why not - saves storage space too. New table for miscellaneous??? (For now, I'll just stick odd stuff below.) Eventually I may get code to improve the comment section but in the meantime, i found an online forum site which makes things easy and fast. First though is to bring some order to the numbering system which right now is conflicted between normal chronological postings, logical pointing system, and page groupings in reverse chronological.

    Also need to ensure font is not too small on newer hi res screens. Please use your browsers zoom feature as needed - or complain!

    As you can see, Netfirms is hosting this site. My frugal buddy Johnny suggested it as the most economical site for a modest blogger. The two domains and the two sites cost about a case of beer per year which i guess is justified. There is limited storage and limited bandwidth but that's ok for now. They offer pagemaking services but being a control freak, I prefer to stick to my own understandable system. Hope you enjoy.

Bob's 'Breviations

  • LRT - Light Rapid Transit
  • MSM - Main Stream Media
  • k, Mn, Bn, Tn - thousand, Million, Billion, Trillion Dollars
  • GMO - Genetically Modified Organism Foods
  • PIIGS - Portugal, Iceland, Ireland, (Italy?) Greece, Spain,
  • OSAP - Ontario Student Assistance Program.
  • RAP - Repayment Assistance Plan
  • CSLP - Cdn Student Loan Program
  • Cdn, US, Aus, GB, Fr, Ont, PQ - Places abbreviated
  • F - fluorine or, because I'm lazy, fluoride, fluoridated water

Pet Peeves

      * gummerment overspending
      * what we're doing to our political and educational systems -

      * banksterism.

      * political correctness (equity policies) along with

      * MSM - mainstream media, especially the Spectator, our local rag

      * human rights commissions and their guilty-until-proven-innocent destruction of our ancient rights. Soon to get worse.

      * Overmedication in our society - this link relates to kids ADD, ADHD

      * Rigid thinking, dismissiveness, judgementalism, The Spectator

      * legal liability issues - playgrounds, bake sales gone. This is stupid (corporatism).

      * senior (upper levels of ) gummerment funding - distorts and deflects responsibility

      * Public sector unions

      * credentialism

      * a little rant on mailboxes!

      * spelling in the English language. The real culprit is Johnson and his dictionary that picked words before they ripened!

      * apathetic people. Plato said 'Your silence gives your consent'

      * aphids, Torx screwdrivers, proprietary parts, the great Eyeglass ripoff

    * retired Professional Engineer, married, father of 2 including one still in the system.

    * pursuing many interests - partial list below

    * small-c conservative (but not a Harper PC - that's the party of big business!)

    * investigating causes of economic problems, finding troubling trends and possibilities

    * Former candidate, Hamilton East Stoney Creek, FCP, Public System Trustee, Ward 4

Links to other Interests.


For other items or requests, please feel free to email me. Sorry for the spambot-fighting inconvenience but I've learned not to provide the normal link or the inbox becomes clogged or breaks down completely. Please paste the following then remove the spaces and add the usual symbols where noted:

r o b e r t i n n e s (at sign) r o b e r t i n n e s (dot) c a.

Alternatively, Click here to bring up your email window - but you'll have to change the fake address!