Wednesday, April 06, 2005
Fundraiser - The Two Faces of Azimuth
Hey, everybody! Here’s a good chance to get out, have a good time, and support a good cause.
I’m involved with Azimuth Theatre. Az produces and sponsors new artists here in Edmonton, and also maintains an educational theatre program to educate youth about social issues such as substance abuse—these are the ‘two faces’ of Azimuth.
Anyway, to help support our educational program, Azimuth is hosting a ‘Two Faces of Azimuth’ party. It’s an evening of comedy, drama, dance, and music. It’s going to be a GREAT program and will make for a great night out. There will also be a silent auction of cool items you can bid on.
If you can come out, you’ll get dinner, a short version of ‘Wrecked’, Azimuth’s award-winning touring piece for youth, and excerpts from Azimuth’s cutting-edge drama programs. Local band Potemkin Village will also be featured - for those of you who don’t know, that’s the band that Drew is part of. After the main program, there will be an afterparty and dancing ‘til the wee hours.
Tickets for the event are $30 ($50 for a couple) and are in limited supply. It’s well worth it - a full evening, with entertainment and dinner, for less than the cost of dinner and a movie. There will, of course, also be a cash bar.
So come on out—you’ll have a good time and be doing some good, too!
“The Two Faces of Azimuth”
======================
Saturday, 9 April 2005
8529 Gateway Blvd.
6 pm cocktails, dinner 6:30pm, program 8:00pm
You can get tickets from me - just e-mail me at .
Thursday, March 03, 2005
Where I’ve Been
Well, this blog has certainly fell into disuse.
It’s not by choice, but rather because of the inconvenient fact that there are only 24 hours in the day. My little company is incredibly busy, with ongoing work on four websites (including a new site for the Fringe, a coup for us), several smaller database projects, the SU elections, bidding on some new work, and regular client work for the SU and others, and some longer-term strategic projects. It’ not going to get much better for a couple more months; hopefully, not for many months. All this work is a good thing - we’ve expanded our staff and are getting some really good projects. But high growth poses its’ own challenges, and managing it takes a *lot* of time. And what time I do find, I’ve been devoting to Azimuth Theatre, where we’re planning a fundraiser for April.
Props to our staff, too—they’ve all been doing a fantastic job.
Anyway, that’s it for now.
Monday, December 13, 2004
The case for Clinton.
Charts and graphs of the Clinton economy.
Thursday, December 09, 2004
Even worse than credit cards!
300-700+% interest on payday loans. The New York Times has more.
From Bloomberg:
Payday lending is rooted in a practice that spread through impoverished neighborhoods in American cities such as Boston, New York and Philadelphia at the end of the 19th century, Peterson says.
In those days, ``salary lenders’’ advanced workers portions of their weekly earnings.
After state legislatures cracked down on usury in the early 20th century, organized crime syndicates moved in, and salary lenders earned a new moniker—loan sharks. They typically charged 250 percent annual interest.
``Payday lenders actually charge more than mafia loan sharks,’’ says Peterson, author of ``Taming the Sharks: Towards a Cure for the High-Cost Credit Market’’ (University of Akron Press, 2004).
Guess which ‘family-values’ party the payday loan industry mafia supports, by a margin of 2 to 1…
Monday, December 06, 2004
Random notes.
1. Hi, Neuman. Long time. Congratulations on the parent thing.
2. iTunes Music Store comes to Canada. Sweet Jesus, it’s about time. And handy for Christmas gift-giving.
3. Best place to drink on Whyte? Suggestions, please.
4. For those of you who think markets always work, if only governments would stop regulating them, go watch this. Did YOU know that your credit card company can jack your interest rate if you miss any OTHER creditor or utility payment, even if you always pay your cc on time? It’s called universal default, and just ONE missed payment can trigger a change in your rates. Yeah, that’s real fair to consumers.
The New York Times has a related story.
My company would never pull that kind of sh*t on our customers - it’s unethical. In fact, it used to be illegal, until the lending industry was partly deregulated. We’re not talking about small increases to cover increased risk, we’re talking 10 or even 20 point jumps in interest rates - pure profit plays that are designed to get you off of the low introductory rates they charge. That prime-rate card you have? Guess what - they PLAN to jack your rate the first chance they get. That promise that ‘we’ll never raise your rates’ is conditional on you never missing a payment to ANY creditor on the grid.
They didn’t make that very clear to you, did they?
(Canadian cc may be a little different - my CIBC cards haven’t changed rates, but my one US-based card did.)
Thursday, November 25, 2004
Modern Life.
That crazy SAPIG®
SAPIG® has updated the Alberta map.
Full-size copy viewable here.
SAPIG Trivia: Way back before the Internet was cool - like in the mid-90s - SAPIG had a website called PRoNG - the People’s Republic of North Garneau. The PRoNG itself was about 120 feet by 60 feet, contained one house with a variable population, and was the location of many famous house parties. I believe SAPIG currently subsidizes their formidable alcohol budget with the monthly extortion payments extracted to prevent publication of photos from those parties.
Sadly, PRoNG was conquered by a local real estate agent, sending SAPIG into exile in their current (undisclosed) location.
I think SAPIG should create a new PRoNG blog.
Wednesday, November 17, 2004
Edmonton polls.
Ipsos-Reid
Methodology: 800 surveyed provincewide with margin of error at 3.5%, conducted between Oct. 22 and 26, 2004. Don’t know the Edmonton number surveyed.
In Edmonton:
PCs – 38%
Liberals – 35%
NDP – 14 %
Alberta Alliance – 8%
Global TV
260 people were polled in Edmonton from Nov. 8 to 16.
The poll is considered accurate 19 times out of 20 with a margin of error of +/- 5.5 per cent.
PCs – 35%
Liberals – 23%
NDP – 17 %
AA - 6%
Undecided – 19%
The undecideds in the Ipsos poll are not specified in the numbers I have, but it’s the same poll noted below, so I’ll assume they didn’t push leaners. That means that either the Edmonton numbers are of decided voters only, or there were few undecideds in their sample (<5%).
Now, I have a hard time believing the Liberals have *lost* 1/3 of their support in two weeks - especially in light of the awful PC campaign (not a lot of content, and those dumb AISH comments). So one of these polls is off. Personally, I really like the Liberals’ platform (disclaimer: I do paid work for them) and think that they’re closer to the PCs than the Global poll indicates. I’m not sure how the NDs are doing.
A big part of this is going to be how the undecideds (19% in the Global poll) break. Typically, undecideds break late against the incumbent; however, there are two main challengers, so I don’t think this will redound against the PCs much.
Polls and more.
(Updates at the end.)
Polls - I don’t put too much stock in them, for reasons I outline at the end of this post. I’ll also post other polls here if I get a chance.
Ipsos-Reid poll
Released Oct 30, conducted between Oct. 22 and 26. 800 surveyed provincewide with margin of error at 3.5%.
PCs – 50%
Liberals – 26%
NDP – 10%
Alberta Alliance – 9%
Undecided – 15%
Compass Poll
Released November 8. Telephone interviews to 500 Albertan adults, conducted on Nov. 3 and Nov. 4, 2004. Margin of error is 4.5 per cent. Alliance not included.
Conservative - 61%
Liberal - 19%
New Democratic Party - 16%
Green - 3%
Separation Party - 1%
Other - 1%
While the differences between these polls may or may not be within the margin of error (hard to tell due to different methodologies), the difference between them would result in a huge difference in outcomes in terms of seats. Also, the Compass poll reports decided voters only, which tends to skew results a bit. I don’t know if they pushed leaners or not.
I think the basic position in early November was PC-50, Lib-25, ND-15, AA-8. Now, the question is, has anything changed since then? Global has a new poll out, but I don’t have those numbers yet.
UPDATE - I copied this down from the TV really quickly; I may have made transcription errors. UPDATE 2 - got new numbers from Anand’s webboard post.
GlobalTV Alberta poll
Conducted over one week, 900 voters province-wide.
PC - 41%
Lib - 18%
ND - 10%
AA - 8%
Greens - 5%
SC - 1 %
Others - 3%
Undecided - 13%
I’m not sure of these numbers, but they do look a bit weird. PCs around 40, but still over 20 points ahead of their nearest rival? Popular vote in previous years:
2001
PCs – 62%
Liberals – 27%
NDP – 8%
1997
PCs – 51%
Liberals – 33%
NDP – 9%
SC - 7%
The five-point difference for the Liberals resulted in an 11-seat difference for the Liberals - 18 in ‘97, 7 in ‘01. So I think if the Liberals can get to 30%, their seat count could well hit double digits.
Also of interest: Detailed riding results, 2001.
I think this year will be more like 1997 than 2001, simply because the AA will fill the role that the SoCreds did in ‘97, bleeding off a little PC support, and keeping the PC vote below 55%. I think both the Liberals and the NDs will gain seats. Having said that, if the Compass poll is a harbinger, the opposition parties will be lucky to get 8 seats combined.
The detailed riding results from 2001 show that many of the Edmonton ridings are within reach for any of the three main parties. Turnout is key. Edmonton will come down to the Liberals’ ground game. The ND’s ground game in their hot ridings will be excellent (I volunteered for Raj in his first election and was duly impressed), but I have absolutely no idea how strong the Liberals will be on the ground.
Truth be told, the PCs *should* be able to have a crushing ground game, simply because they have resources, resources, resources. Lots of cash. But I’m skeptical - I don’t know how motivated their base is compared to the oppositions’. Not very, I think.
UPDATE 3: New Ipsos poll is out.
Decided voters, Nov. 12 -17.
Conservatives - 44%
Alberta Liberals - 29%
Alberta NDP - 12%
Alberta Alliance - 9%
Alberta Greens - 4%
Thursday, November 04, 2004
The United States of Canada
And here’s another!
Wednesday, November 03, 2004
Disappointed. Also glad to be Canadian.
I am disappointed Kerry didn’t win.
What I’m really disturbed about, however, is some of the margins on ballot questions banning gay marriage in several states. Most of them *also* explicitly or implicitly ban civil unions, too, which is even more chilling. Almost all also explicitly state that marriages sanctioned in another jurisdiction would not be recognized - sounds apartheid-ish to me.
In the following list, the first number is the percentage of voters voting to ban gay marriage. CNN has all the numbers here.
- Arkansas: 75% / 25% - implicitly includes civil unions in the ban
- Georgia: 77%/ 23 % - appears to ignore the issue of civil unions
- Kentucky: 75/25 - explicitly includes civil unions in the ban
- Michigan: 59/41 - explicitly includes civil unions in the ban
- Mississippi: 86/14 - appears to ignore the issue of civil unions
- Montana: 66/34 - includes civil unions in the ban
- North Dakota: 73/27 - explicitly includes civil unions in the ban
- Ohio: 62/38 - explicitly includes civil unions in the ban
- Oklahoma: 76/24 - explicitly includes civil unions in the ban
- Oregon: 57/43 - ignores civil unions in ban; leaves door open to recognize same-sex unions from other jurisdictions
- Utah: 66/34 - explicitly includes civil unions in the ban
Couple this with the likelihood of the Supreme Court becoming much more conservative over the next four years, and the gay and lesbian community in the US has a real uphill fight.
Simply put, the results on gay marriage suck. I’ve known and been good friends with many gays and lesbians over the years, and it is incredibly absurd to me that their relationships will receive absolutely NO legal protection in much of the US. Your gay partner in the hospital? Sorry, you don’t get family visitation or decision-making rights. That’s f&*cked.
I have a real hard time understanding why some non-gay people get so exercised about the sexuality of other people. I really don’t get it. If you don’t like it or it makes you uncomfortable, fine - avert your eyes. But what business is it of mine what you do in your bedroom or who you choose as a companion? Answer: None.
Tuesday, November 02, 2004
E-Day!
People are starting to arrive in RATT to watch the election. Check back later for photos and more.
