Snails Attacking Miami Homes

Snails Attacking Miami Homes.  The East African land snail, or giant African land snail, scientific name Achatina fulica, is a species of large, air-breathing land snail.  Since making their first appeared in 2011, the state has vanquished nearly 130,000 of the pesky snails, which eat not only 500 kinds of shrubbery and produce, but also stucco — an essential building material for Florida homes and offices.

Florida officials are actively seeking out these giant marauders to prevent further spreading of this unusual problem.  The city of Miami is now in the process of using trained dogs to find the snails in hopes of eradicating them.

More than 128,000 Giant African Land Snails have been found and eradicated in the two years since the highly destructive creatures invaded the Miami-Dade area, Florida Commissioner of Agriculture Adam H. Putnam says.

More and more strange animals and other species which have no known predators or natural controls are making their way to North America.   It’s thought that the snail invasion began with the smuggling of a few snails into Florida by a man who practices a traditional African religion. He reportedly convinced some followers to drink the snails’ juices.

Summerside Pawn Shop – Mega Pawn

Mega Pawn is open for business in Summerside PEI.  Long time resident of Summerside, Nic Frost, is no stranger to the Pawnshop business as he managed a store for his mother in his early years.  Mega Pawn is located on the Main Street of Summerside and does a thriving business.  When visiting Summerside stop by and visit the “Island’s Unique Version” of Pawn Stars.

For thousands of years, people all over the world have from time to time found themselves with one problem in common-the need for fast cash. And for almost as long, there’s been one easy way to solve it: To “pawn” personal items of value for a cash loan. Throughout history, pawnbrokers have provided monetary loans in exchange for valuable items.

Over 3,000 years ago, pawn shops first emerged in Ancient China as a method of granting short-term credit to peasants. Some pawnbrokers operated independently, but over time most of these businesses were run through pawn shops. Pawnbroking thrived in ancient Greece and Rome, giving merchants a way to get small shops off the ground.

A pawnbroker is an individual or business (pawnshop or pawn shop) that offers secured loans to people, with items of personal property used as collateral. The word pawn is derived from the Latin pignus, for pledge, and the items having been pawned to the broker are themselves called pledges or pawns, or simply the collateral.

Items put up for pawn are held for an agreed period of time, during which the pawner may redeem the item after paying the agreed amount of interest. If not collected in the agreed upon time frame the Pawnbroker will then offer the item for sale. An experienced Pawn Broker will take into account how long an item will take to sell when deciding on the amount of money he will allow for collateral loan.

People defaulting on there Pawned items are not reported to any Credit Bureaus as the items Pawned will be sold at a profit by the Pawn Broker. Also because the loan is secured by items of value Pawn Brokers to not do Credit Checks prior to taking items in on Pawn.

Pawn Brokers have been subjected to some TV exposure with the advent of shows like “Pawn Stars”, “American Pickers” and “American Restoration”. Many people realize that Pawn Shops can carry old, antique and very unique items and are an interesting place to visit.

Government Trying to Infringe On Our Privacy

Government Trying to Infringe On Our Privacy. A majority of Canadians think that the Conservatives’ proposed online surveillance Bill C-30 is too intrusive and should be defeated,  according to a poll by Angus-Reid. The poll, conducted February 23-24 and surveying 1,011 respondents on the polling firm’s online panel, found 53 per cent of Canadians believe the bill is too intrusive, compared to only 27 per cent who believe the it is necessary to fight online criminal activity.

The Privacy International investigation revealed that surveillance companies commonly promote virtually unlimited monitoring capabilities to governments and police agencies. For example, Italian-based Innova offers “solutions for the interception of any kind of protocols and IP-based communication, such as web browsing, email and web-mails, social networks, peer-to-peer communication, chat and videochat.”

“The government has a voracious appetite for our private information. Now, with electronic records, we do that by linking electronic databases without ever creating the actual, old file. It’s all already there,” said Micheal Vonn, policy director with the B.C. Civil Liberties Association.

Section 33 tells us that, ‘The Minister may designate persons or classes of persons as inspectors for the purposes of the administration and enforcement of this Act.’..Section 34 spells out the sweeping powers of these “inspectors.” And, if they sound Orwellian, welcome to the world of Section 34.

The inspectors may “enter any place owned by, or under the control of, any telecommunications service provider in which the inspector has reasonable grounds to believe there is any document, information, transmission apparatus, telecommunications facility or any other thing to which this Act applies.” And, once he or she is in, anything goes. The inspector, says the bill, may “examine any document, information or thing found in the place and open or cause to be opened any container or other thing.” He or she may also “use, or cause to be used, any computer system in the place to search and examine any information contained in or available to the system.”

There is an inherent lack of transparency in this bill that extends way beyond what the government is telling us,  are you surprised? Included in this bill is the fact that, by default everyone has the right to ask any company that is subject to the law what information they have about him or her, how they’ve used it and to whom they’ve disclosed it. That is, unless that right is overridden by Section 9. Section 23 of C-30 essentially says that any personal information that is handed over without a warrant under the lawful access law has to be treated in the same way under PIPEDA as information disclosed in response to a law enforcement request. Here’s where the gag order kicks in. If the person exercises his lawful right to seek his or her personal information and accounting of its use, the ISP is prohibited from telling him or her unless the police, national security agencies or competition cops give their OK. And they can refuse to give their OK on a number of relatively flexible bases.

Energy audits a waste of energy

Energy audits a waste of energy.  Forcing energy audits on sellers is both inefficient and problematic

  By Vince Brescia

To many people, the Ontario government’s recent announcement that all homes must have an energy audit before being sold must sound like a good idea. In fact, the legislation states that an energy audit is required prior to all real property transactions, including leases. So much the better, some may say.

The legislation does not actually specify that an independent audit is required. That intention was announced by the government, and would have to be spelled out in regulations. The legislation actually specifies that sellers must provide “information, reports or ratings” on “energy consumption and efficiency.” The government says the audits should cost about $300. However, a province-wide audit infrastructure does not yet exist so the market price for audits once they are in demand is yet to be determined.

There are certainly positive aspects to mandatory audits. Everyone who buys a home will get some information on the energy efficiency of the home (property) they are buying. It will increase consumers’ awareness about this aspect of real estate. And it will incent some potential sellers to take steps to improve the energy efficiency of their properties.

However, forcing energy audits on sellers is both inefficient and problematic.

Firstly, not all purchasers will want or make us of this service, regardless of whether or not some think they should have it. The intent of the legislation is to provide value to purchasers. However, energy efficiency may not be a priority for the purchaser, because they are interested in the property for other reasons. Therefore, the expense will be wasted in many circumstances, making it inefficient.

A second problem is that the scheme will create a considerable amount of energy consumption. There are about 460,000 real estate transactions in Ontario every year. Most audits will require a return truck or van trip by auditors to each property, consuming energy. The infrastructure of a bourgeoning home audit industry will also generate significant energy consumption.

A third problem is that many homes (properties) do not really need an audit. If they are relatively new homes, they will have had to meet building code standards for energy efficiency, making the information provided of little use to the buyer. Another example is condominiums, where neither buyer nor seller has much control over the energy efficiency of the condominium unit. In condominiums, the main parts of the infrastructure that determine energy efficiency are controlled by the condominium corporation, not the unit owner.

Another problem is that information from a standardized system like this often does not provide customers with the information they are interested in, or in a format that meets their needs.

Adding to the last problem, the audit will be paid for by the seller, not the buyer, making the seller the client. This introduces moral hazard into the system, where sellers look for auditors who provide favourable audits, and find auditors willing to comply. The legislation does not indicate whether or not there will be standards for, or policing of energy auditors.

A final key problem is that the new cost associated with the energy audits must come at the expense of something else. In the language of economists this is the “opportunity cost.” The money spent on the audit may come out of capital expenditures on energy efficiency, which already have a high priority with Ontarians. Or it may come out of other important priorities, such as improving the building’s health and safety. The point is that it is not a free new benefit. It comes at the expense of something else. Given that it does so inefficiently, it is not a great idea.

In this age of growing consumer awareness and interest in energy conservation, a mandatory audit approach is not necessary. The most efficient option is to let those who value energy audits to pay to have them done. The consumer is the best one to judge when such audits will have value, what specific information they need, and in what format.

Given that so many purchasers these days already have independent inspections done before buying, it is clear that consumers are not shy about paying to get the information they value prior to making an important purchasing decision. In fact, purchasers can easily ask their home inspector to opine on energy efficiency, without necessitating a second inspection.

Financial Post
Vince Brescia is president & CEO of the Federation of Rental-housing Providers of Ontario .

Another Rip Off Tax Payers Always Take the Hit

THIS IS SERIOUS STUFF…….READ IT ALL AND SEND IT TO FRIENDS All Canadians should read this.

FROM: The Hon. Diane Finley P.C.M.P., Minister of Human Resources and Skills Development
I am pleased to respond to your electronic message which was forwarded to me by the Office of the Prime Minister the Right Honourable Stephen Harper regarding private member’s Bill C-428.
Another Rip Off  Tax Payers Always Take the Hit.  As you know Bill C-428 proposes to amend the Old Age Security Act to reduce the residence requirement for entitlement to a monthly pension from ten years to three years. This private member’s bill was introduced in the House of Commons by M.P. Ruby Dhallaa Liberal Opposition Member. As the Minister responsible I have been very clear that when this Bill comes forward we will strongly oppose it.
The Old Age Security (OAS) pension is paid to seniors in recognition of the contribution that they have made to Canadian society the economy and their community. The OAS program is non-contributory and is based solely on age and residence in Canada after the age of 18. The ten-year residence rule is consistent with many other countries that have residence or contribution requirements associated with their national pensions to ensure that benefits are given in proportion to years of residence or affiliation with their pension programs. With this in mind it is felt that the current ten-year residence requirement represents a balance between a reasonable contribution to Canadian society and the right to receive a lifelong pension.
It is estimated that reducing the ten-year eligibility requirement to three years would cost over $700 million annually in additional OAS and Guaranteed Income Supplement benefits. Given that the OAS program is funded entirely from general tax revenues this would be costly and place an additional burden on the Canadian taxpayer.
Yours sincerely The Hon. Diane Finley P.C.M.P. Minister of Human Resources and Skills Development
Don’t quit yet … Bill #C-428 [THANKS TO RUBY DHALLA AND BOB RAE] Only if you disagree with this Bill … Pass this message along. This bill should not have seen the light of day … And yet it will receive second reading at the next sitting of parliament. Please read the bill and make your own decision. If you disagree with the bill send this to everyone over the age of 50 in your address book …. Or those who may be turning 50 in a few years. Hopefully by letting your member of parliament know your feelings on the bill it will be defeated. If you agree with the bill you don’t need to do anything..
URGENT ATTENTION About Our OAS pensions Bill C-428 An Act to Amend the Old Age Security Act (residency requirements) Bill C-428 will allow recent immigrants to apply for OAS in 3 years instead of the existing 10. This bill had first reading in the house on June 18, 2009. It was seconded by Bob Rae! MP Ms Ruby Dhalla who introduced the bill represents the riding of Brampton whose population is mainly East Indian. Right now you have to have lived in Canada for 10 years in order to qualify for Old Age Security. She wants the time reduced to 3 years.
Thousands could come to Canada when they are 62 years old never having worked or contributed to this country’s tax system etc and qualify for full Old Age Security benefits. 10 years minimum is reasonable – 3 is not! Look this up Google C-428 and you will see this bill has only one purpose and that is to ‘featherbed’ a select group of people for votes. I certainly hope this bill does not get passed. It is about time we called our elected MP’s to ask them to NOT support this bill.  Their response may be one factor in helping us determine who gets elected in the next election. Keep on reading and then ACT !
What Can You Do?
1. Spread the message to family friends and e-mail buds.
2. Write letters send e-mails to all your list and call Members of ParliamentIt is time Canada looked after it’s vets and long-term citizens before tossing OUR hard-earned money around on people who have no right to this money, never having paid taxes or contributed to our economy. If a family wishes to bring elderly relatives here and are willing to waive their own right to collect these funds in order that the elderly relatives can receive them … Fine. Otherwise do not expect the Canadian taxpayers to do it.

There are too many people abusing the generosity of the Canadian people. We need to stop this NOW! We, our children and our grand children currently owe the global investment community over $500 billion dollars … The sum of our accumulated National Debt that is never publicized.Now READ THIS..
Canada Pensions… Only in Canada

* It is interesting to know that the federal Government of Canada allows :a. A monthly pension of: $1,890.00 to a simple refugee

b. plus: 580.00 in social aid = for a grand total of: $2,470.00 monthly X 12 months   =
$28,920.00 annual income

By comparison the Old Age Pension of a senior citizen who has contributed to the development of Our Beautiful Big Country during 40 or 50 years CANNOT receive more than :
a. $1,012.00 / month   in Old Age Pension and Guaranteed Income Supplement x 12 months   = $12,144.00 annual income
A difference of: $16,776.00 per year

Perhaps our senior citizens should ask for the Status of Refugees instead of applying for Old Age Pension.

Let us send this message to as many Canadians as possible and maybe the allowance of refugee could then be reduced to $1012.00 and that of our Canadian pensioners (who actually deserve it) raised to $2470.00 per month…the money that they have been paying in income taxes for 40 or 50 years AN INCREDIBLE NONSENSE !!!

OUR CANADIAN SENIORS CITIZENS DESERVE BETTER!

Kyoto Protocol Canada Thumbs Nose at the World

Kyoto Protocol Canada Thumbs Nose at the World.  Canada has formally pulled out of Kyoto Protocol just in time for Christmas. This did not come as a surprise to most people as Canada as been steadily increasing it Greenhouse gas omissions almost from the day it signed the accord.

Thirty-nine of the forty countries have ratified the Protocol. Of these, thirty-four have committed themselves to a reduction of greenhouse gases (GHG) produced by them to targets that are set in relation to their 1990 emission levels, in accordance with the Protocol.  Canada’s reputation in the international community will forever remained “tarnished” after the selfish lack of concern they have shown towards fighting this global problem.

While Europe has actually reduced its Greenhouse emissions by 17%, Canada, a developed country, has actually managed to increase its Greenhouse emissions by 17%,  not a record to be proud of.  Canada has been a member of Kyoto Protocol since 1998 but has done little to reduce emissions since then.

Canada has shown the world that it lacks the political will to take an active part in fighting global warming. As Alberta oil sands development steps up, Canada’s emission numbers will only get worse, as separating the oil from the sands requires tremendous amounts of energy.  Big business controls what and how the government does business and the Canadian government has turned its back on global cooperation.

The current government has done little to reduce emissions, in fact they have shelved programs like the EnerGuide retrofitting program which had its unfortunate beginning as a Liberal program.  The conservatives Clean Air Act had no merit and as some like to say, was “Dead on Arrival”.

Last year, a record 30.6 gigatonnes of carbon dioxide poured into the atmosphere, mainly from burning fossil fuel – a rise of 1.6Gt on 2009, according to estimates from the IEA regarded as the gold standard for emissions data.  This is the legacy we will be passing on to our children.   A temperature rise of more than 2 degrees Celsius – which scientists say is the threshold for potentially “dangerous climate change” maybe just a pipe dream as we blow by that bench mark following our Governments failure to act and the ability of big business to prevent any significant reductions.  The Alberta Tar Sands will probably end up being the future generations “Poster Child” as the symbol of greed of a few, overcoming the “needs of the many.”